Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Updated May 2026

Is Your Pension Healthy?

PensionRisk analyzes funding ratios, 3-year trends, and PBGC risk levels for public, corporate, and multiemployer pension plans using DOL Form 5500 filings. Some plans are funded below 60%, meaning they may not be able to pay full benefits long-term.

Funding analysis for 151 pension plans covering 33,522,611 workers and retirees. Every plan gets a Pension Health Score from A to F.

151
Pension Plans
33,522,611
Participants
$5176.2B
Total Assets
$6883.9B
Total Liabilities
75.2%
Avg Funding Ratio

Most Underfunded Plans

View all →

Chicago Firefighters Annuity & Benefit Fund

City of Chicago

19.5% funded$7.8B gap
13,500 participantspublic
F

Kentucky Employees Retirement System (KERS)

State of Kentucky

20.4% funded$28.1B gap
142,000 participantspublic
F

Chicago Policemen's Annuity & Benefit Fund

City of Chicago

23.3% funded$15.8B gap
31,000 participantspublic
F

Chicago Municipal Employees Annuity & Benefit Fund

City of Chicago

25.3% funded$18.0B gap
59,000 participantspublic
F

Judges Retirement System of Illinois

State of Illinois

35.2% funded$1.8B gap
3,100 participantspublic
D

Connecticut State Employees Retirement System (SERS)

State of Connecticut

38.2% funded$23.0B gap
112,000 participantspublic
D

State Employees Retirement System of Illinois (SERS)

State of Illinois

40.4% funded$29.2B gap
152,000 participantspublic
D

Bakery & Confectionery Union Industry International Pension Fund

BCTGM International Union

41.8% funded$4.1B gap
100,402 participantsmultiemployer
D

Chicago Teachers Pension Fund

City of Chicago

42.8% funded$16.6B gap
69,000 participantspublic
D

State Universities Retirement System of Illinois (SURS)

State of Illinois

44.1% funded$28.5B gap
218,000 participantspublic
D

Largest Pension Plans

California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS)

State of California

67.3% funded$230.0B gap
2,050,000 participantspublic
C

Teacher Retirement System of Texas (TRS)

State of Texas

78.1% funded$54.0B gap
1,730,000 participantspublic
B

New York State & Local Retirement System (NYSLRS)

State of New York

95.3% funded$12.2B gap
1,070,000 participantspublic
A

Florida Retirement System (FRS)

State of Florida

82.2% funded$41.1B gap
1,065,000 participantspublic
B

California State Teachers Retirement System (CalSTRS)

State of California

72.9% funded$118.0B gap
985,000 participantspublic
B

North Carolina Retirement Systems

State of North Carolina

87.1% funded$16.6B gap
960,000 participantspublic
A

Ohio Public Employees Retirement System (OPERS)

State of Ohio

82.5% funded$22.3B gap
762,000 participantspublic
A

Virginia Retirement System (VRS)

State of Virginia

75.1% funded$28.8B gap
740,000 participantspublic
B

Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS)

State of Wisconsin

98.4% funded$2.0B gap
665,000 participantspublic
A

Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund

Teamsters Central States

94.1% funded$3.5B gap
634,861 participantsmultiemployer
A

Browse by Health Grade

AGrade A Plans
56
BGrade B Plans
53
CGrade C Plans
29
DGrade D Plans
9
FGrade F Plans
4

Browse by Plan Type

public107multiemployer14corporate30

Browse by State

Illinois

13 plans · 60.3% avg funded

California

12 plans · 72.1% avg funded

Texas

10 plans · 80.9% avg funded

New York

9 plans · 88.4% avg funded

Michigan

8 plans · 73.4% avg funded

Virginia

6 plans · 86.3% avg funded

District of Columbia

6 plans · 68.8% avg funded

Ohio

5 plans · 79.7% avg funded

Pennsylvania

5 plans · 59.8% avg funded

New Jersey

5 plans · 60.9% avg funded

Georgia

4 plans · 79.6% avg funded

Minnesota

4 plans · 81.4% avg funded

Kentucky

3 plans · 40.4% avg funded

Connecticut

3 plans · 55.7% avg funded

Tennessee

3 plans · 95.6% avg funded

Maryland

3 plans · 71.5% avg funded

Delaware

2 plans · 82.0% avg funded

Washington

2 plans · 89.8% avg funded

North Carolina

2 plans · 91.1% avg funded

Massachusetts

2 plans · 57.7% avg funded

Colorado

2 plans · 65.7% avg funded

Arizona

2 plans · 72.0% avg funded

Missouri

2 plans · 81.5% avg funded

Louisiana

2 plans · 64.8% avg funded

Alabama

2 plans · 68.8% avg funded

Arkansas

2 plans · 72.9% avg funded

Oklahoma

2 plans · 68.8% avg funded

Kansas

2 plans · 72.3% avg funded

New Mexico

2 plans · 66.0% avg funded

West Virginia

2 plans · 73.2% avg funded

Rhode Island

2 plans · 71.9% avg funded

Vermont

2 plans · 61.3% avg funded

Alaska

2 plans · 65.4% avg funded

Florida

1 plans · 82.2% avg funded

Wisconsin

1 plans · 98.4% avg funded

South Dakota

1 plans · 96.6% avg funded

Utah

1 plans · 90.3% avg funded

Idaho

1 plans · 88.3% avg funded

Nebraska

1 plans · 87.9% avg funded

Oregon

1 plans · 77.3% avg funded

South Carolina

1 plans · 55.1% avg funded

Indiana

1 plans · 78.2% avg funded

Iowa

1 plans · 84.7% avg funded

Mississippi

1 plans · 60.0% avg funded

Nevada

1 plans · 76.2% avg funded

Hawaii

1 plans · 59.9% avg funded

Maine

1 plans · 80.1% avg funded

New Hampshire

1 plans · 64.9% avg funded

Montana

1 plans · 75.3% avg funded

Wyoming

1 plans · 78.1% avg funded

North Dakota

1 plans · 68.9% avg funded

Best Funded Plans

View all →

California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS)

State of California

67.3% funded$230.0B gap
2,050,000 participantspublic
C

Teacher Retirement System of Texas (TRS)

State of Texas

78.1% funded$54.0B gap
1,730,000 participantspublic
B

New York State & Local Retirement System (NYSLRS)

State of New York

95.3% funded$12.2B gap
1,070,000 participantspublic
A

Florida Retirement System (FRS)

State of Florida

82.2% funded$41.1B gap
1,065,000 participantspublic
B

California State Teachers Retirement System (CalSTRS)

State of California

72.9% funded$118.0B gap
985,000 participantspublic
B

North Carolina Retirement Systems

State of North Carolina

87.1% funded$16.6B gap
960,000 participantspublic
A

Featured Plans

View all plans →

New York State Teachers Retirement System (NYSTRS)

State of New York

97.1% funded$3.9B gap
433,000 participantspublic
A

Plumbers & Pipefitters National Pension Fund

United Association (UA)

64.1% funded$11.8B gap
430,000 participantsmultiemployer
C

New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)

State of New Jersey

52.3% funded$31.0B gap
425,000 participantspublic
C

Indiana Public Retirement System (INPRS)

State of Indiana

78.2% funded$10.3B gap
425,000 participantspublic
B

Illinois Teachers Retirement System (TRS)

State of Illinois

44.7% funded$77.7B gap
424,000 participantspublic
D

Georgia Teachers Retirement System (TRS)

State of Georgia

77.4% funded$21.6B gap
405,000 participantspublic
B

Maryland State Retirement & Pension System

State of Maryland

72.1% funded$23.6B gap
398,000 participantspublic
B

Texas County & District Retirement System (TCDRS)

Texas Counties

86.2% funded$6.3B gap
385,000 participantspublic
A

Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS)

State of Tennessee

92.1% funded$4.9B gap
378,000 participantspublic
A

Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA)

State of Minnesota

79.1% funded$9.2B gap
378,000 participantspublic
B

Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)

State of Oregon

77.3% funded$24.7B gap
375,000 participantspublic
B

Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS)

State of Iowa

84.8% funded$6.4B gap
372,000 participantspublic
A

NYC Employees Retirement System (NYCERS)

New York City

76.8% funded$23.3B gap
370,000 participantspublic
B

UFCW International Union Industry Pension Fund

UFCW International

85.9% funded$848.9M gap
365,494 participantsmultiemployer
A

Kansas Public Employees Retirement System (KPERS)

State of Kansas

72.3% funded$9.5B gap
328,000 participantspublic
B

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Pension Health Score?

The Pension Health Score rates pension plans from A (healthiest) to F (most at-risk) based on three weighted factors: funding ratio (50%), 3-year funding trend direction (30%), and PBGC risk level (20%). A plan with 100% funding, an improving trend, and low PBGC risk would score 100/100 and receive an A grade. Plans scoring below 40 receive a D or F, indicating severe underfunding, deteriorating trends, or elevated insolvency risk. The score is designed to help current and future retirees quickly assess whether their pension plan is on solid financial footing or showing signs of distress.

What is a funding ratio?

A funding ratio compares a pension plan's current assets to its total projected liabilities (the present value of all promised future benefits). A plan with $80 million in assets and $100 million in liabilities is 80% funded. Plans above 100% are considered fully funded and can meet all obligations. Plans between 80-100% are generally considered healthy but may need to increase contributions. Plans below 80% are classified as underfunded, and those below 65% are at serious risk of benefit cuts, requiring emergency employer contributions, or in the case of multiemployer plans, entering "critical status" under federal law.

Where does this data come from?

Pension data comes from three primary public sources: DOL Form 5500 annual filings, which are required for all corporate and multiemployer pension plans and contain detailed financial statements, participant counts, and funding levels; the Boston College Center for Retirement Research Public Plans Database, which tracks over 200 state and local government pension plans; and PBGC annual reports and financial statements for insured plan data. Each source is updated on an annual cycle, and we process new data within one month of publication. All data is publicly available through federal databases.

What does PBGC coverage mean?

The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) is a federal agency that insures private-sector defined benefit pension plans. If a PBGC-covered plan is terminated without enough money to pay all promised benefits, PBGC steps in and pays benefits up to a legal maximum (approximately $7,500 per month for a 65-year-old retiree in 2024). PBGC is funded by insurance premiums paid by covered plans, not by taxpayer dollars. Public sector plans (state and local government pensions) are not covered by PBGC, which means underfunded public plans must rely on employer contributions, benefit adjustments, or legislative action to address shortfalls.

What is the difference between a defined benefit and defined contribution plan?

A defined benefit (DB) pension plan promises a specific monthly payment in retirement, typically based on a formula involving years of service and final salary. The employer bears the investment risk. A defined contribution (DC) plan, like a 401(k), specifies how much money goes in but makes no guarantees about the payout. The employee bears the investment risk. PensionRisk focuses on defined benefit plans because they carry the greatest financial risk when underfunded. Most private-sector employers have shifted to DC plans over the past 30 years, but DB plans remain common in government and unionized industries.

What happens if a pension plan fails?

When a private-sector pension plan fails, PBGC takes over and pays benefits up to the guaranteed maximum. However, highly paid retirees may see their benefits reduced to the PBGC cap. For multiemployer plans (union pension plans covering workers at multiple employers), PBGC benefits are lower and plans may implement benefit suspensions before reaching insolvency. The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 provided $86 billion in grants to struggling multiemployer plans. For public-sector plans, there is no federal backstop. Underfunded public plans may reduce cost-of-living adjustments, increase employee contributions, or raise the retirement age for new hires.